Do those of you in favor of Universal Health Care know what category you are in? Medicare Math:?

Question

Medicare Math

You want medicare for all you say? Thats the solution? You keep tossing that 3% around like it means something? Welp, here's the numbers:

1. According to Medicare's website, Medicare covers almost one seventh of the population.
2. To be able to do so, it requires 3% of the entire salaries, of every working person in the US.
3. To expland Medicare to cover everyone in the US, you take the rate (3%) and multiply by the 7 (to accomodate the other 6/7 of the population).
4. This means to fund Medicare for all, there needs to be a 21% tax added.
5. It's important to remember that Medicare tax is a flat tax, the rich pays 3% now and will pay 21% later, so will the poor.

So how does this affect you? It depends on which of the following groups you are in:

1. You are wealthy: If you are wealthy, you are going to pay more taxes. Deal with it you greedy *bleepard*.

2. You are middle class and currently have health insurance through your work: You just lost that option but you get Medicare instead. Oh, and the cost to you is more than you were paying for your medical coverage. Oh, and now you are stuck with the carpy Medicare program. Suck it up.

3. You are middle class and one of the 30 million people who didn't have health care even though you could afford it because you wanted to take the risk and keep the money: Congratulations, you now have Medicare and yes, you're paying for it. You were making a bad decision and Hillary thinks you don't deserve the right to make that choice. Suck it up.

4. You were lower middle class and one of the who really couldn't afford health care, an adult (because every state has a program for kids), and didn't qualify for Medicare: Hey, this is actually a good deal for you. All six million of you. (Who cares that it is a bad deal for the other 294 million people in the US).

5. You were actually POOR and already qualified for Medicare: Nothing changed with respect to your health coverage, but you now pay 21% Medicare tax instead of 3%. Yep, you just lost almost a 5th of your income, (and no, no matter what your income is, the tax on Medicare is NEVER refunded) for no change in health coverage.

Oh, and remember this 21%, is still in addition to your federal and state income taxes. If you were middle class before the implementation, you won't be afterwards, not when over half your money is going to the government.

Btw, all the numbers used above, were rounded IN FAVOR of Universal Health Care.

And the increase to 21%? That assumes that Medicare won't get less efficient as it gets bigger. Based on the history of efficiency of every government program, 30% is more likely. But I'm giving Hillary the benefit of the doubt

Regarding: "do you think he got all that money by PAYING all of the claims submitted to him? "

Insurance companies make their profit by forcing health care providers to pay less than they normally would. While the doctor would charge 100 for a visit, they agree to only charge the insurance company 20, this improves the number of patients that can see that doctor.

Regarding: "see, I can pull random numbers that mean nothing out of my anus too"

What part of the math do you not understand. 3% isn't randomn, its the exact amount that comes out of your check every payday. Check the pay stub.

Regarding: "That number is not correct." It is. All numbers quoted are directly from Medicare's own website or extrapolated from the numbers on Medicares site to include the rest of the US.

Regarding: "Would you rather your taxes go to building tanks or going to help your family and friends?" and "Audit the military budget"

THe military budget and health care are not related

Regarding: "First, the Medicare tax is 1.45%, not 3%. Maybe the 3% number you hear is the overhead administrative costs of Medicare."

No it isn't. While YOUR part is 1.45%, your employer is required to match it, resulting in 3% (ok, 2.9 if you want to quibble).

Answer 1

And for all this money we get to wait 3 months to see a specialist, let them decide if and when we need surgery and let them choose our doctors.

Sounds like a good trade off to me. LOL

Answer 2

Several flaws in your reasoning.

First, the Medicare tax is 1.45%, not 3%. Maybe the 3% number you hear is the overhead administrative costs of Medicare.

Secondly, I would imagine that health care costs are much higher for the elderly than for the general population. So it would not cost 7 times as much to pay for the entire population.

Even if it did, if I paid 10.15% of my income (7x 1.45%) that would about equal what my HMO insurance costs now. Assuming my employer took the money they are paying for my insurance and either turned it over as enhanced medicare or paid it to me in salary (those are big ifs, I admidt) I wouldn't be paying any more than I am now and everyone would have the healthcare that they need.

EDIT: You are right. I forgot about employer match of medicare. But, still, The elderly have more expensive healthcare costs than young people. US Heathcare costs are 16% of GDP. I don't know how you calculate what % of taxable income as opposed to GDP. Universal healthcare with NO copays should bring down total costs because people will get the treatment the need before they get sicker.

Answer 3

The problem is people don't realize they will end up paying for it in the long run nothing is for free especially if the government Sez it is. And what is wrong with the CEO making the trump jealous you don't make it. And look at how many people he employsya want them out of a job?

Answer 4

If Hillary gets elected, I just may be in the category that moves out of the country. I can barely tollerate seeing and hearing here as much as I currently do without being subjected to her on a daily basis.

Answer 5

Pardon me whilst I vomit. I have health insurance and it's nowhere near 30% of my income. It worries me when I hear people talk about how it will be so good. God save this country....

As far as prescription stuff, I say, if you find me a politician not bought by the pharmaceuticals, I would vote for them if they open the borders. Yes, it's less safe, but it's the free market. Are you willing to pay more for guaranteed safety or are you willing to buy cheaper on the hopes it's good? I don't know but that's how you end the pharmaceutical juggernauts that are just kicking the snot out of everyday americans.

Answer 6

Universal Health Ins. would be far cheap to run that the current system. No Ins. Co's making tons of profit and paying execs huge salaries. No uninsured going to emerg rooms for very expensive care, the amount a doctor makes would be held down, you wouldn't have Ins. Co premium to pay partially offsetting the taxes....and, as some proponents of UHI have pointed out...we're already paying for universal coverage...we're just not getting it. To a very large extent, it's matter of shift the way money is spent instead of raising the costs.

Answer 7

Look at the cost of health care though. I live on the Mexican border. I see people going across the line daily to get their Rx. One guy told me his Rx was 200.00 here, and 20.00 across the line. There is no difference in the Rx.

Answer 8

THANK YOU, no one understands the math behind these things even though it is very obvious.

Is everyone paying attention and taking notes?

Answer 9

That number is not correct. Even if it WAS, the US has enough money to make it happen, it's just a matter of priorities. Would you rather your taxes go to building tanks with no spending limit or going to help your family and friends?

Answer 10

Obama's health care plan is better.